home > Psychologist's advice > Decrees of the 7th Ecumenical Council on the Creed. Ecumenical councils and their description

Decrees of the 7th Ecumenical Council on the Creed. Ecumenical councils and their description

Who “declared the Orthodox faith of the whole people and exalted your holy catholic and apostolic spiritual mother, the Church of Rome, and, together with other Orthodox emperors, revered her as the head of all Churches.” Further, the pope discusses the primacy of the Roman Church, identifying Orthodoxy with her teaching; as a justification for the special significance of the department of ap. Peter, to whom “great reverence should be shown by all believers in the world,” the pope points out that this “prince of the apostles ... the Lord God has given power to bind and loose sins in heaven and on earth ... and handed over the keys of the kingdom of heaven” (cf.: Mt 16 18-19; the Greek version of the Epistle adds the Apostle Paul everywhere along with the Apostle Peter). Having proved the antiquity of icon veneration with a lengthy quotation from the Life of Pope Sylvester, the pope, following St. Gregory I (the Great) the Dialogist asserts the need for icons for the instruction of the illiterate and pagans. At the same time, he cites examples from the Old Testament symbolic images, created by man not according to his own understanding, but according to Divine inspiration (Ark of the Covenant, decorated with golden cherubs; a copper snake created by Moses - Exodus 25; 37; 21). Citing passages from patristic writings (Blessed Augustine, Saints Gregory of Nyssa, Basil the Great, John Chrysostom, Cyril of Alexandria, Athanasius the Great, Ambrose of Mediolanum, Epiphanius of Cyprus, Blessed Jerome) and a large fragment from the words of St. Stephen of Bostra "On the Holy Icons", the pope "begs on his knees" the emperor and empress to restore the holy icons, "so that our holy catholic and apostolic Roman Church will receive you in her arms."

In the final part of the epistle (known only in the Latin original and most likely not read to the Council), Pope Adrian sets the conditions under which he agrees to send his representatives: the curse of the iconoclastic false council; written guarantees (pia sacra) from the emperor and empress, patriarch and synclite of impartiality and the safe return of papal envoys, even if they disagree with the decisions of the Council; the return of confiscated possessions to the Roman Church; restoration of the jurisdiction of the pope over the church district, torn away under the iconoclasts. Declaring that "the chair of St. Peter on earth enjoys primacy and was established in order to be the head of all the Churches of God”, and that the name “universal Church” can only refer to it, the pope expresses bewilderment at the title of the Patriarch of Constantinople “universalis patriarcha” and asks that henceforth this title was never used. Further, the pope writes that he was delighted with the confession of Patriarch Tarasius, but was indignant that a secular person (apocaligus, literally, who took off his military boots) was elevated to the highest church degree, “for such people are completely unaware of the duty of teaching.” Nevertheless, Pope Adrian agrees with his election, since Tarasius participates in the restoration of holy icons. In the end, promising the Emperor and Empress the patronage of St. Peter, the pope sets them as an example Charlemagne, who conquered "all the barbarian nations lying in the West", and returned to the See of Rome the "legacy of St. Peter" (patrimonia Petri).

In a response message to Patriarch Tarasius himself (undated), Pope Adrian calls on him to contribute in every possible way to the restoration of icon veneration and delicately warns that if this is not done, he "will not dare to recognize his consecration." In the text of this message, the question of the title "ecumenical" is not raised, although there is also a phrase that the chair of St. Peter "is the head of all the Churches of God" (the Greek version exactly corresponds in key points to the Latin original taken by Anastasius the Librarian in the papal archives).

The reaction of the Eastern patriarchs

Embassy to east. patriarchs (Politian of Alexandria, Theodoret of Antioch and Elijah II (III) of Jerusalem), whose Churches were located on the territory of the Arab Caliphate, met with significant difficulties. Despite the truce concluded after the devastating campaign of Bud. Caliph Harun al-Rashid in the city, relations between the empire and the Arabs remained tense. Having learned about the purpose of the embassy, the Orthodox of the East, accustomed since the time of St. John of Damascus to defend icon veneration from the attacks of the Byzantines, did not immediately believe in a sharp turn in the church policy of Constantinople. It was announced to the envoys that all sorts of officers. contacts with the patriarchs are excluded, because due to the suspiciousness of Muslims, they can lead to dangerous consequences for the Church. After long hesitation, the clergy agreed to send two hermits to the Cathedral, John, ex. Syncellus of the Patriarch of Antioch, and Thomas, hegumen of the monastery of St. Arseny in Egypt (later Metropolitan of Thessaloniki). They delivered a reply message to the emperor and empress and patriarch, composed on behalf of the "bishops, priests and monks of the East" (read to the Council in Act 3). It expresses joy over the Orthodox. confessions of Patriarch Tarasius and praise to the imp. authorities, “which is the strength and stronghold of the priesthood” (in this regard, the beginning of the preamble to the 6th novel of Justinian is quoted), for the restoration of the unity of faith. The text more than once speaks of the plight of Christians under the yoke of the "enemies of the cross" and reports that correspondence with the patriarchs is impossible; sending the hermits John and Thomas as representatives of all the Orthodox East, the authors of the message urge not to attach importance to the forced absence at the Council of the Eastern. patriarchs and bishops, especially if representatives of the pope arrive (the VI Ecumenical Council is mentioned as a precedent). As a general opinion of the Orthodox of the East, the text is attached to the letter conciliar message Theodore I, the former patriarch of Jerusalem (d. after), sent by him to the patriarchs Cosmas of Alexandria and Theodore of Antioch. It sets out in detail the doctrine of the 6 Ecumenical Councils and, with proper theological justification, confesses the veneration of holy relics and venerable icons. A special role at the forthcoming Council was assigned to the South Italian clergy. Regions South. Italy and Sicily, cut off from the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the pope under the iconoclast emperors, served as a place of refuge for numerous icon worshipers. The Sicilian hierarchs, subordinate to Constantinople, acted as mediators in settling relations with the pope: imp. the message to Pope Adrian was delivered by Constantine, ep. Leontinsky; patriarchal - delegation with the participation of Theodore, ep. Katansky. In conciliar acts, bishops from Yuzh. Italy, as well as deac. Epiphanius of Catania, representative of Thomas, Met. Sardinian, are listed among the metropolitans and archbishops, higher than the bishops of other regions.

The representation of the regions at the Council reflects the political realities of Byzantium con. VIII century: most of the bishops came from the west. regions of M. Asia; from the east ruined by the Arabs. provinces arrived only a few. people, and the area of continental Greece, occupied by glory. tribes and only recently conquered by Stavrakii (783–784), were not represented at all. Crete in the first 3 acts was represented only by Met. Elijah.

Opening of the Council in Constantinople and its disruption by the military

Both Peters asked the same question to the entire Council, to which the unanimous answer followed: “We allow and accept.” The representative of the East, John, thanked God for unanimity " holy patriarchs and ecumenical pastors" Adrian and Tarasius and for the care shown by imp. Irina. Following this, all the participants in the Council (including Metropolitans Basil of Ancyra and Theodore of Mir, Archbishop Theodosius of Amoria) in turn expressed their agreement with the teaching contained in the letters of the pope, uttering basically the following formula: , and I accept sacred and honest icons, according to ancient tradition; I anathematize those who think otherwise.” At the request of the Council and Patriarch St. Tarasius, representatives of monasticism were also supposed to join the confession of icon veneration.

3rd act.

28 Sept. (in Lat. transl. Sept. 29). Gregory of Neocaesarea, Hypatius of Nicaea and other repentant bishops appeared. Gregory of Neocaesarea read out repentance and confession, similar to those read in Act 1 by Basil of Ancyra. But St. Tarasius announced that he was under suspicion of beating icon worshipers during the persecution, for which he was to be defrocked. The council offered to collect evidence and investigate the case, but Gregory vehemently denied allegations of violence or persecution.

Then the message of Patriarch St. Tarasia to the east. patriarchs and a reply message sent by the bishops of the East, with a copy of the conciliar message of Theodore, Patriarch of Jerusalem, attached to it. After reading them, the representatives of the pope expressed their satisfaction that Patriarch St. Tarasy, and east. Bishops agree in Orthodoxy. faith and teaching about the worship of honest icons with Pope Adrian, and anathematized those who think otherwise. Behind them is agreement with the confessions of Patriarch St. Tarasius and the "Eastern" and the anathema on dissidents were uttered by the metropolitans and archbishops, including those who had just been received into communion. Finally, the entire Council, declaring full agreement with the messages of Pope Adrian, the confession of Patriarch St. Tarasia and the messages of the East. bishops, proclaimed the veneration of holy icons and anathema to the false council of 754. St. Tarasius thanked God for the unification of the Church.

4th act.

Oct 1 It became the longest. Restored Orthodoxy. the doctrine had to be consolidated among the people, for many years of iconoclasm, weaned from the veneration of icons. In this regard, at the suggestion of the Patriarch, the Council heard all those passages from the Holy. Scripture and St. fathers on whom the clergy could rely in preaching. In the course of reading texts from books borrowed from the patriarchal library or brought to the Council by individual bishops and abbots, the fathers and dignitaries commented and discussed what they had heard.

Texts were read from the Holy Scriptures about images in the Old Testament temple (Ex 25:1-22; Numbers 7:88-89; Eze 41:16-20; Heb 9:1-5). The antiquity of the custom of icon veneration was attested from the works of Saints John Chrysostom (about the revered icon of St. Meletius), Gregory of Nyssa and Cyril of Alexandria (about the depiction of the sacrifice of Isaac), Gregory the Theologian (about the icon of King Solomon), Antipater of Bostra (about the statue of Christ erected by the healed bleeding ), Asterius of Amasia (about the picturesque depiction of the martyrdom of St. Euphemia), Basil the Great (on Blessed Varlaam).

The kissing of St. Maximus the Confessor of the icons of the Savior and the Mother of God, along with the Gospel and the honest Cross, also read the rule of Trul. 82 (about the image on the icons of Christ instead of the old lamb); while St. Tarasy explained that the rules were adopted under imp. Justinians II are the same fathers who participated in the VI Ecumenical Council under his father, and "let no one doubt them."

A large passage on the worship of images was read from the 5th book. "Apology against the Jews" Leontius, ep. Naples of Cyprus. When reading the message of St. Nile to the eparch Olympiodor with recommendations on the painting of the temple, it turned out that it was read at the iconoclastic false cathedral with cuts and corrections - this allowed many to be misled. It turned out that the bishops were not shown the books themselves, but were read extracts from some tablets (pittЈkia). Therefore, this time the fathers paid special attention to the fact that when reading books were shown, and not separate notebooks, and that the most important texts coincided in different codes.

Of great dogmatic importance for the refutation of the accusation of icon worshipers in the "split" of Christ were passages about the identity of the worship of the image and the prototype from the works of Sts. Anastasius I, Patriarch of Antioch ("worship is the manifestation of reverence").

The final chord was the messages of the primates of the Roman and Constantinople thrones: a certain Pope Gregory to St. Germanus, Patriarch of Constantinople, approving his fight against heresy, and 3 epistles of St. Herman with a denunciation and refutation of iconoclastic plans: to John, Met. Sinadsky, to Constantine, ep. Nakoliysky, and to Thomas, Met. Claudiopolis (the last two are heresiarchs of iconoclasm).

The meeting ended with a theological conclusion. Patriarch St. Tarasius invited the participants to join "the teachings of the Holy Fathers, guardians of the Catholic Church." The council answered: “The teachings of the godly fathers corrected us; drawing from them, we are drunk with the truth; following them, we drove away the lie; taught by them, we kiss the holy icons. Believing in one God, glorified in the Trinity, we kiss honest icons. Whoever does not follow this will be anathema." Further anathematisms were pronounced:

accusers of Christians - persecutors of icons;
applying the sayings of Divine Scripture, directed against idols, to honest icons;
not accepting with love holy and honest icons;
calling sacred and honest icons idols;
those who say that Christians resort to icons as gods;
those who hold the same thoughts with dishonoring and dishonoring honest icons;
those who say that someone other than Christ our God delivered Christians from idols;
who dare to say that Christ. The church has ever accepted idols.

5th act.

Oct 4 Continued acquaintance with the works of the fathers in order to denounce the iconoclasts. After reading the 2nd catechumen of St. Cyril of Jerusalem (about the crushing of the cherubim by Nebuchadnezzar), the epistles of St. Simeon the Stylite the Younger to Justin II (demanding punishment for the Samaritans who abused the icons), John of Thessaloniki’s “Words Against the Gentiles” and “Dialogue between a Jew and a Christian” it was recognized that those who reject icons are similar to Samaritans and Jews.

Particular attention was paid to the refutation of the arguments put forward against the veneration of icons. Apocryphal Travels of the Apostles, an excerpt from which (where Apostle John condemns Lycomedes for having installed an icon with his image in his bedroom) was read at a false cathedral, as follows from another passage, turned out to be contrary to the Gospels. To the question of Patricius Petrona, whether the participants in the false council had seen this book, Met. Gregory of Neocaesarea and Archbishop Theodosius of Amorius replied that they were only reading extracts on leaflets. The Council anathematized this work as containing Manichaean ideas about the illusiveness of the Incarnation, forbade copying it and ordered it to be put on fire. In this regard, a quotation from the writings of St. Amphilochius of Iconium on books falsely inscribed by heretics.

Turning to the disapproving opinion about the icons of Eusebius of Caesarea, expressed in a letter to Constance, sister of imp. Constantine the Great and his wife Licinius, the Council heard an excerpt from the same author from the 8th book. to Euphration and denounced him in Arian views.

Further, excerpts from the church histories of Theodore the Reader and John the Diacrinomen and the Life of Savva the Sanctified were read; it followed from them that Philoxen of Hierapolis, who did not approve of the icon, was not even baptized as a bishop, and at the same time was an ardent opponent of the Council of Chalcedon. His associate Sevir of Antioch, as follows from the appeal of the Antiochian clergy to the Council of Constantinople, seized from the churches and appropriated the gold and silver doves dedicated to the Holy Spirit.

Then the Council proclaimed anathemas to the iconoclasts and praises to the emperor and empress and the defenders of icon veneration. Personally were anathematized: Theodosius of Ephesus, Met. Ephesian, Sisinius Pastilla, Met. Pergsky, Vasily Trikakkav, Met. Antioch of Pisidia, - the leaders of the iconoclastic false council; Anastasius, Constantine and Nikita, who occupied the See of Constantinople and condoned iconoclasm; John of Nicomedia and Constantine of Nakoli - herese leaders. Eternal memory was proclaimed to the defenders of icons condemned at the false council: St. Herman I, Patriarch of Constantinople, St. John of Damascus and George, archbishop. Kiprsky.

The council composed 2 appeals to the emperor and empress and the clergy of Constantinople. In the 1st, among other things, the identity of the concepts “kiss” and “worship” is affirmed, based on the etymology of the verb “kiss”.

8th act.

Oct 23 The emperor and empress further “considered it impossible not to be present at the Council” and a special letter addressed to Patriarch St. Tarasia invited the bishops to the capital. The "God-protected Empress, shining with happiness" Irina and her 16-year-old son Constantine VI met the participants of the Council in the Magnavra Palace, where the final meeting of the Council was held in the presence of dignitaries, military leaders and representatives of the people. After brief speeches by the Patriarch and the Emperor and Empress, the decision adopted by the Council was read aloud, again unanimously confirmed by all the bishops. Then a scroll with a definition presented to St. Tarasius, was sealed with the signatures of the imp. Irina and imp. Constantine VI and returned to the patriarch through the patrician Stavraky, which was met with laudatory acclamations.

At the direction of the emperor and empress, the patristic testimonies about icons (from the 4th act) were again read to the audience. The Council ended with universal thanksgiving praises to God. After that, the bishops, having received gifts from the emperor and empress, dispersed to the dioceses.

In the conclusion of the conciliar acts, 22 church canons are given, adopted by the Council.

Consequences of the Council.

The Council's decisions were largely in line with the wishes of Pope Hadrian. However, the demands of the See of Rome for the return of the church areas torn from its jurisdiction in Italy and the Balkans were actually ignored (the corresponding passage from the message of the pope, as well as his reproaches about the elevation of St. Tarasius to the patriarchate from the laity and his title, were removed from the Greek text of the acts and at the Council, probably, were not heard). Nevertheless, the conciliar acts were approved by his messengers and delivered to Rome, where they were placed in the papal office.

However, for a number of reasons, the Council was strongly opposed by King Charlemagne. In the context of aggravated relations with imp. Irina, the powerful monarch, took the ecclesiastical rapprochement between Rome and Constantinople extremely painfully. At his insistence, a document was drawn up in the city, known as the Libri Carolini (Charles Books); in it, the Council was declared the local Council of the "Greeks", and its decisions were declared null and void; The court theologians of King Charles rejected the justification for the worship of icons, based on the relationship between the image and the prototype, and recognized the only practical value of the icons as decoration of churches and a guide for the illiterate. Not the last role in the negative attitude towards the Cathedral was played by the extremely low quality of the armor available. translation of his deeds; in particular, the words of Constantine, Met. Kiprsky, about the inadmissibility of worshiping icons in the sense of service, were understood in the opposite sense, as an attempt to attribute to icons decent only the service and worship of the Holy Trinity. The document was adopted at the Frankfurt Council in 794 with the participation of papal legates. Pope Adrian and his successors defended themselves against the attacks of the Franks, who again condemned the position of Rome and the "Greeks" regarding icons at the Council of Paris in 825; at the Council of Constantinople 869-870. (the so-called "eighth ecumenical") the envoys of Rome confirmed the definitions of the VII Ecumenical Council. In the West, the veneration of icons has not been recognized as a universally binding dogma, although the theoretical justification for icon veneration in the Catholic. theology as a whole corresponded to the 7th Ecumenical Council.

In Byzantium itself, after the "relapse" of iconoclasm (815-843), caused primarily by the most severe military failures under the icon-worshipping emperors, this heresy was finally eliminated under the imp. St. Theodore and imp. Michael III; at a ceremony called the Triumph of Orthodoxy (), the decisions of the VII Ecumenical Council were solemnly confirmed. With the victory over the last significant heresy, which is recognized as iconoclasm, comes the end of the era of Ecumenical Councils, recognized in Orthodoxy. Churches. The dogma worked out on them was fixed in the "Synodikon in the week of Orthodoxy".

Theology of the Council

The VII Ecumenical Council was no less than a Council of "librarians and archivists." Extensive collections of patristic quotations, historical and hagiographic evidence were supposed to show the theological correctness of icon veneration and its historical rootedness in tradition. It was also necessary to revise the iconoclastic florilegium of the Council of Hieria: as it turned out, the iconoclasts widely resorted to fraud, for example, pulling quotations out of context. Some references were easily dismissed by pointing out the heresy of the authors: the Arian Eusebius of Caesarea and the Monophysites Sevir of Antioch and Philoxen of Hierapolis (Mabbugsky) could not have authority for the Orthodox. Theologically meaningful Refutation of the Ierian definition. “The icon is similar to the prototype not in essence, but only in name and in the position of the depicted members. A painter who paints someone's image does not seek to depict the soul in the image ... although no one thought that the painter separated a person from his soul. It is all the more senseless to accuse icon worshipers of claiming to represent the deity himself. Rejecting the accusation of the iconodules of the Nestorian division of Christ, the Refutation says: “The Catholic Church, confessing an unmerged union, mentally and only mentally inseparably divides natures, confessing Immanuel as one even after the union.” “The icon is another matter, and the prototype is another matter, and none of the prudent people will ever look for the properties of the prototype on the icon. The true mind does not recognize anything more on the icon than its similarity in name, and not in essence, with the one depicted on it. Replying to the iconoclastic teaching that the true image of Christ is the Eucharistic Body and Blood, the Refutation says: "Neither the Lord, nor the apostles, nor the fathers ever called the bloodless sacrifice offered by the priest an image, but called it the Body itself and the Blood itself." In presenting the Eucharistic Views as an image, the iconoclasts are mentally divided between Eucharistic realism and symbolism. Icon veneration approved at the Holy. A tradition that does not always exist in a written form: “Many things have been handed down to us in writing, including the preparation of icons; it has also been widespread in the Church since the time of the apostolic sermon. Word - figurative medium, but there are other means of image. “Pictorialism is inseparable from the gospel narrative and, conversely, the gospel narrative is inseparable from the figurativeness.” The iconoclasts considered the icon to be an “ordinary object”, since no prayers were supposed to be used to consecrate the icons. The VII Ecumenical Council replied to this: “Over many of such objects that we recognize as saints, sacred prayer is not read, because by their very name they are full of holiness and grace ... denoting [the icon] famous name, we attribute her honor to the prototype; kissing her and worshiping her with reverence, we receive sanctification. Iconoclasts consider it an insult to attempt to depict the heavenly glory of the saints by means of "inglorious and dead matter", "dead and despicable art". The Council condemns those who “consider matter vile.” If the iconoclasts had been consistent, they would also have rejected sacred garments and vessels. Man, belonging to the material world, cognizes the supersensible through the senses: “Since we are, without a doubt, sensual people, in order to know and remember every divine and pious tradition, we need sensible things.”

"Determination of the holy Great and Ecumenical Council, the second in Nicaea" reads:

“...we preserve all church traditions, approved in writing or non-written. One of them commands to make pictorial icon images, since this, in accordance with the history of the gospel sermon, serves as confirmation that God the Word is true, and not ghostly incarnated, and serves to our benefit, because such things that mutually explain each other, without doubts and prove each other. On this basis, we, who walk the royal path and follow the divine teaching of our holy fathers and the tradition of the Catholic Church - for we know that the Holy Spirit dwells in it - determine with all diligence and circumspection that holy and honest icons be offered (for worship) exactly just like the image of honest and life-giving cross whether they are made of paints or (mosaic) tiles or of any other substance, as long as they are made in a decent manner, and whether they are in the holy churches of God on sacred vessels and clothes, on walls and on tablets, or in houses and on the roads, as well as whether these will be icons of the Lord and God and our Savior Jesus Christ, or the immaculate Lady of our Holy Mother of God, or honest angels and all holy and righteous men. The more often with the help of icons they are made the subject of our contemplation, the more those who look at these icons are aroused to the memory of the very prototypes, acquire more love for them and receive more motivation to give them kisses, reverence and worship, but not the true service that, according to our faith, belongs to the divine nature alone. They are excited to bring incense to icons in honor of them and consecrate them, just as they do it in honor of the image of the honest and life-giving Cross, holy angels and other sacred offerings, and as, according to pious aspiration, this was usually done in antiquity; because the honor given to the icon refers to its prototype, and the worshiper of the icon worships the hypostasis depicted on it. Such a teaching is contained in our holy fathers, that is, in the tradition of the Catholic Church, which received the Gospel from ends to ends [of the earth]... - either innovations, or reject anything that is dedicated to the Church, whether it be the Gospel, or the image of the cross, or icon painting, or the holy remains of the martyr, as well as (daring) with cunning and treacherously invent something for that in order to overthrow at least any of the legitimate traditions found in the Catholic Church, and finally (daring) to give common use to sacred vessels and venerable monasteries, we determine that such, if they are bishops or clerics, should be deposed, if there are monks or laity would be excommunicated"

In the true Orthodox Church of Christ it was seven: 1. Nicene, 2. Constantinople, 3. Ephesian, 4. Chalcedonian, 5. Constantinople 2nd. 6. Constantinople 3rd and 7. Nicene 2nd.

FIRST Ecumenical Council

The first Ecumenical Council was convened in 325 city, in the mountains. Nikea under Emperor Constantine the Great.

This Council was called against the false teaching of the Alexandrian priest Aria, which the rejected Divinity and eternal birth of the second Person of the Holy Trinity, Son of God, from God the Father; and taught that the Son of God is only the highest creation.

The Council was attended by 318 bishops, among whom were: St. Nicholas the Wonderworker, James Bishop of Nisibis, Spyridon of Trimyphus, St. Athanasius the Great, who at that time was still in the rank of deacon, and others.

The Council condemned and rejected the heresy of Arius and approved the indisputable truth - dogma; The Son of God is true god, born of God the Father before all ages and as eternal as God the Father; He is begotten, not created, and consubstantial with God the Father.

In order for all Orthodox Christians to know exactly the true teaching of the faith, it was clearly and briefly stated in the first seven parts. Creed.

At the same Council it was decided to celebrate Easter at first Sunday the day after the first full moon in spring, it was also determined for the priests to be married, and many other rules were established.

SECOND Ecumenical Council

The Second Ecumenical Council was convened in 381 city, in the mountains. Constantinople, under the emperor Theodosius the Great.

This Council was convened against the false teachings of the former Arian Bishop of Constantinople Macedonia who rejected the Deity of the third Person of the Holy Trinity, Holy Spirit; he taught that the Holy Spirit is not God, and called Him a creature or a created power, and at the same time serving God the Father and God the Son, as the Angels.

The Council was attended by 150 bishops, among whom were: Gregory the Theologian (he was the chairman of the Council), Gregory of Nyssa, Meletios of Antioch, Amphilochius of Iconium, Cyril of Jerusalem and others.

At the Council, the heresy of Macedonia was condemned and rejected. Cathedral approved the dogma of the equality and consubstantiality of God the Holy Spirit with God the Father and God the Son.

The Council also supplemented the Nicaean Symbol of faith five parts, in which the doctrine is set forth: on the Holy Spirit, on the Church, on the sacraments, on the resurrection of the dead, and on the life of the age to come. Thus was formed Niceotsaregradsky Symbol of faith, which serves as a guide for the Church for all time.

THIRD Ecumenical Council

The Third Ecumenical Council was convened in 431 city, in the mountains. Ephesus, under Emperor Theodosius 2nd the Younger.

The Council was convened against the false teachings of the Archbishop of Constantinople Nestoria who impiously taught that the Blessed Virgin Mary gave birth common man Christ, with whom, later, God united morally, dwelt in Him as in a temple, just as He formerly dwelt in Moses and other prophets. Therefore, Nestorius called the Lord Jesus Christ Himself a God-bearer, and not a God-man, and called the Most Holy Virgin a Christ-bearer, and not the Mother of God.

The Council was attended by 200 bishops.

The Council condemned and rejected the heresy of Nestorius and decided to recognize the union in Jesus Christ, from the time of the incarnation, of two natures: divine and human; and determined: to confess Jesus Christ as perfect God and perfect Man, and the Blessed Virgin Mary as the Theotokos.

Cathedral also approved Nikeotsaregradsky Symbol of faith and strictly forbade any changes or additions to it.

FOURTH Ecumenical Council

The Fourth Ecumenical Council was convened in 451 year, in the mountains. Chalcedon, under the emperor Marcians.

The council was convened against the false teachings of the archimandrite of a monastery in Constantinople Eutychius who denied human nature in the Lord Jesus Christ. Refuting heresy and defending the Divine dignity of Jesus Christ, he himself went to extremes and taught that in the Lord Jesus Christ human nature was completely absorbed by the Divine, why in Him only one Divine nature should be recognized. This false doctrine is called Monophysitism, and his followers are called Monophysites(one-naturalists).

The Council was attended by 650 bishops.

The Council condemned and rejected the false teaching of Eutyches and determined the true teaching of the Church, namely, that our Lord Jesus Christ is true God and true man: according to Divinity He is eternally born of the Father, according to humanity He was born of the Most Holy Virgin and in everything is like us, except for sin. . At the incarnation (birth from the Virgin Mary), the Divinity and humanity were united in Him as a single Person, unchanging and unchanging(against Eutyches) inseparable and inseparable(against Nestorius).

FIFTH Ecumenical Council

The Fifth Ecumenical Council was convened in 553 year, in the city Constantinople, under the famous emperor Justinians I.

The council was convened over disputes between the followers of Nestorius and Eutyches. The main subject of controversy was the writings of three teachers of the Syrian Church, who were famous in their time, namely Theodore of Mopsuetsky, Theodoret of Cyrus and Willow of Edessa in which Nestorian errors were clearly expressed, and at the Fourth Ecumenical Council nothing was mentioned about these three writings.

The Nestorians, in a dispute with the Eutychians (Monophysites), referred to these writings, and the Eutychians found in this an excuse to reject the 4th Ecumenical Council itself and slander the Orthodox universal church that she seemed to have strayed into Nestorianism.

The Council was attended by 165 bishops.

The Council condemned all three writings and Theodore of Mopsuet himself, as not repentant, and regarding the other two, the condemnation was limited only to their Nestorian writings, while they themselves were pardoned, because they renounced their false opinions and died in peace with the Church.

The council again repeated the condemnation of the heresy of Nestorius and Eutyches.

SIXTH Ecumenical Council

The Sixth Ecumenical Council was convened in 680 year, in the city Constantinople, under the emperor Constantine Pogonate, and consisted of 170 bishops.

The council was convened against the false teachings of heretics - monothelites who, although they recognized in Jesus Christ two natures, Divine and human, but one Divine will.

After the 5th Ecumenical Council, the unrest produced by the Monothelites continued and threatened the Greek Empire with great danger. Emperor Heraclius, desiring reconciliation, decided to persuade the Orthodox to make concessions to the Monothelites, and by the power of his power commanded to recognize in Jesus Christ one will in two natures.

Defenders and interpreters true doctrine Churches have come Sophronius, Patriarch of Jerusalem and Constantinopolitan monk Maxim the Confessor, whose tongue was cut out and his hand cut off for the firmness of faith.

The Sixth Ecumenical Council condemned and rejected the heresy of the Monothelites, and decided to recognize in Jesus Christ two natures - Divine and human - and according to these two natures - two wills, but so that the human will in Christ is not opposed, but submissive to His Divine will.

It is noteworthy that at this Council the excommunication was pronounced among other heretics, and Pope Honorius, who recognized the doctrine of one-will as Orthodox. The decision of the Council was also signed by the Roman legates: presbyters Theodore and George, and deacon John. This clearly indicates that the supreme authority in the Church belongs to the Ecumenical Council, and not to the Pope.

After 11 years, the Council reopened meetings in the royal chambers called Trulli, to resolve issues primarily related to the church deanery. In this respect, he, as it were, supplemented the Fifth and Sixth Ecumenical Councils, which is why he is called Fifth-sixth.

The Council approved the rules by which the Church should be governed, namely: 85 rules of the Holy Apostles, rules of 6 Ecumenical and 7 local Councils, and rules of 13 Church Fathers. These rules were subsequently supplemented by the rules of the Seventh Ecumenical Council and two more Local Councils, and made up the so-called " Nomocanon", and in Russian " Pilot Book", which is the basis of the ecclesiastical administration of the Orthodox Church.

At this Council, some innovations of the Roman Church were condemned, which did not agree with the spirit of the decrees of the Universal Church, namely: forcing priests and deacons to celibacy, strict fasts on the Saturdays of Great Lent, and the image of Christ in the form of a lamb (lamb).

SEVENTH Ecumenical Council

The Seventh Ecumenical Council was convened in 787 year, in the mountains. Nikea, under the empress Irina(widow of Emperor Leo Khozar), and consisted of 367 fathers.

Council was convened against iconoclastic heresy, which arose 60 years before the Council, under the Greek emperor Leo the Isaurian, who, wanting to convert the Mohammedans to Christianity, considered it necessary to destroy the veneration of icons. This heresy continued under his son Constantine Copronyme and grandson Leo Khazar.

The Council condemned and rejected the iconoclastic heresy and determined - to supply and believe in St. temples, along with the image of the Holy and Life-Giving Cross of the Lord, and holy icons, to honor and worship them, raising the mind and heart to the Lord God, Mother of God and the Saints depicted on them.

After the 7th Ecumenical Council, the persecution of holy icons was again raised by the subsequent three emperors: Leo the Armenian, Michael Balboi and Theophilus, and for about 25 years worried the Church.

Veneration of St. icons was finally restored and approved for Local Council of Constantinople in 842, under Empress Theodora.

At this Council, in gratitude to the Lord God, who granted the Church victory over iconoclasts and all heretics, Feast of the Triumph of Orthodoxy which is supposed to be celebrated in first Sunday of Great Lent and which is celebrated to this day throughout the Ecumenical Orthodox Church.

NOTE: Roman Catholic Church, instead of seven, recognizes more than 20 universes. cathedrals, incorrectly including in this number the cathedrals that were in the Western Church after the division of the Churches, and the Lutherans, despite the example of the Apostles and the recognition of the whole Christian Church do not recognize any Ecumenical Council.

Ecumenical Councils- meetings of primates and representatives of all Local Churches, convened to depose heresies and affirm the truths of the dogma, to establish rules binding on the entire Church, and to resolve issues of general church importance.

The Ecumenical Council is the only supreme authority in the universal Orthodox Church on matters of dogma and legislation, and, by the action of the Holy Spirit through it and in it, has the property of infallibility; definitions, and the rules of the Ecumenical Council extend to all Local Churches and for all time.

There were seven Ecumenical Councils in total (325-787).

1. Nicene

2. Constantinople

3. Ephesian

4. Chalcedonian

5. Constantinople 2nd

6. Constantinople 3rd

7. Nicene 2nd.

a more detailed history of the 7 ecumenical councils ==»»

FIRST Ecumenical Council

The first Ecumenical Council was convened in 325, in the mountains. Nicaea, under Emperor Constantine the Great.

This Council was convened against the false teaching of the Alexandrian priest Arius, who rejected the Divinity and the pre-eternal birth of the second Person of the Holy Trinity, the Son of God, from God the Father; and taught that the Son of God is only the highest creation.

The Council condemned and rejected the heresy of Arius and approved the indisputable truth - dogma; The Son of God is the true God, born of God the Father before all ages and is just as eternal as God the Father; He is begotten, not created, and consubstantial with God the Father.

In order for all Orthodox Christians to know exactly the true teaching of the faith, it was clearly and briefly stated in the first seven members of the Creed.

At the same Council, it was decided to celebrate Easter on the first Sunday after the first full moon in spring, it was also determined for priests to be married, and many other rules were established.

SECOND Ecumenical Council

The Second Ecumenical Council was convened in 381, in the mountains. Constantinople, under Emperor Theodosius the Great.

This Council was convened against the false teachings of the former Arian Bishop of Constantinople Macedonia, who rejected the Divinity of the third Person of the Holy Trinity, the Holy Spirit; he taught that the Holy Spirit is not God, and called Him a creature or a created power, and at the same time serving God the Father and God the Son, as the Angels.

At the Council, the heresy of Macedonia was condemned and rejected. The Council approved the dogma of the equality and consubstantiality of God the Holy Spirit with God the Father and God the Son.

The Council also supplemented the Nicene Creed with five articles, which set out the doctrine: on the Holy Spirit, on the Church, on the sacraments, on the resurrection of the dead, and on the life of the future age. Thus, the Nicetsaregrad Creed was drawn up, which serves as a guide for the Church for all time.

THIRD Ecumenical Council

The Third Ecumenical Council was convened in 431, in the mountains. Ephesus, under Emperor Theodosius II the Younger.

The Council was convened against the false teaching of the Archbishop of Constantinople Nestorius, who impiously taught that the Blessed Virgin Mary gave birth to a simple man Christ, with whom, later, God united morally, dwelt in Him, as in a temple, just as He formerly dwelt in Moses and other prophets . Therefore, Nestorius called the Lord Jesus Christ Himself a God-bearer, and not a God-man, and called the Most Holy Virgin a Christ-bearer, and not the Mother of God.

The Council was attended by 200 bishops.

The Council condemned and rejected the heresy of Nestorius and decided to recognize the union in Jesus Christ, from the time of the incarnation, of two natures: Divine and human; and determined: to confess Jesus Christ as perfect God and perfect Man, and the Blessed Virgin Mary as the Theotokos.

The Council also approved the Nicetsaregrad Creed and strictly forbade making any changes or additions to it.

FOURTH Ecumenical Council

The Fourth Ecumenical Council was convened in 451, in the mountains. Chalcedon, under the emperor Marcian.

The council was convened against the false teachings of the archimandrite of a monastery in Constantinople, Eutychius, who denied human nature in the Lord Jesus Christ. Refuting heresy and defending the Divine dignity of Jesus Christ, he himself went to extremes and taught that in the Lord Jesus Christ human nature was completely absorbed by the Divine, why in Him only one Divine nature should be recognized. This false doctrine is called Monophysitism, and its followers are called Monophysites (one-naturalists).

The Council was attended by 650 bishops.

The Council condemned and rejected the false teaching of Eutyches and determined the true teaching of the Church, namely, that our Lord Jesus Christ is true God and true man: according to Divinity He is eternally born of the Father, according to humanity He was born of the Most Holy Virgin and in everything is like us, except for sin. . At the Incarnation (birth from the Virgin Mary), the Divinity and humanity united in Him as a single Person, inseparably and unchangingly (against Eutychius), inseparably and inseparably (against Nestorius).

FIFTH Ecumenical Council

The Fifth Ecumenical Council was convened in 553, in the city of Constantinople, under the famous Emperor Justinian I.

The council was convened over disputes between the followers of Nestorius and Eutyches. The main subject of controversy was the writings of three teachers of the Syrian Church, who were famous in their time, namely Theodore of Mopsuet, Theodoret of Cyrus and Willow of Edessa, in which Nestorian errors were clearly expressed, and at the Fourth Ecumenical Council nothing was mentioned about these three writings.

The Nestorians, in a dispute with the Eutychians (Monophysites), referred to these writings, and the Eutychians found in this a pretext to reject the 4th Ecumenical Council itself and slander the Orthodox Ecumenical Church that she allegedly deviated into Nestorianism.

The Council was attended by 165 bishops.

The council again repeated the condemnation of the heresy of Nestorius and Eutyches.

SIXTH Ecumenical Council

The Sixth Ecumenical Council was convened in 680, in the city of Constantinople, under the emperor Constantine Pogonates, and consisted of 170 bishops.

The Council was convened against the false teachings of heretics - Monothelites, who, although they recognized in Jesus Christ two natures, Divine and human, but one Divine will.

The defenders and expounders of the true teaching of the Church were Sophronius, the Patriarch of Jerusalem and the monk of Constantinople Maximus the Confessor, whose tongue was cut out and his hand cut off for the firmness of faith.

The Sixth Ecumenical Council condemned and rejected the heresy of the Monothelites, and determined to recognize in Jesus Christ two natures - Divine and human - and according to these two natures - two wills, but in such a way that the human will in Christ is not opposed, but submissive to His Divine will.

After 11 years, the Council reopened meetings in the royal chambers called Trulli, to resolve issues primarily related to the church deanery. In this regard, he, as it were, supplemented the Fifth and Sixth Ecumenical Councils, and therefore is called the Fifth-Sixth.

The Council approved the rules by which the Church should be governed, namely: 85 rules of the Holy Apostles, rules of 6 Ecumenical and 7 local Councils, and rules of 13 Church Fathers. These rules were subsequently supplemented by the rules of the Seventh Ecumenical Council and two more Local Councils, and made up the so-called "Nomocanon", and in Russian "The Pilot Book", which is the basis of the church administration of the Orthodox Church.

SEVENTH Ecumenical Council

The Seventh Ecumenical Council was convened in 787, in Mt. Nicaea, under Empress Irina (widow of Emperor Leo Khozar), and consisted of 367 fathers.

The Council was convened against the iconoclastic heresy that arose 60 years before the Council, under the Greek emperor Leo the Isaurian, who, wanting to convert the Mohammedans to Christianity, considered it necessary to destroy the veneration of icons. This heresy continued under his son Constantine Copronymus and his grandson Leo Khozar.

The Council condemned and rejected the iconoclastic heresy and determined - to supply and believe in St. temples, along with the image of the Holy and Life-Giving Cross of the Lord, and holy icons, to revere and worship them, elevating the mind and heart to the Lord God, the Mother of God and the Saints depicted on them.

Veneration of St. The icons were finally restored and approved at the Local Council of Constantinople in 842, under Empress Theodora.

At this Council, in gratitude to the Lord God, who granted the Church victory over the iconoclasts and all heretics, the feast of the Triumph of Orthodoxy was established, which is supposed to be celebrated on the first Sunday of Great Lent and which is celebrated to this day in the entire Ecumenical Orthodox Church.

Archpriest Andrei Ovchinnikov

The Seventh Ecumenical Council affirmed that iconography is a special form of revelation of Divine reality, and through Divine services and icons, Divine revelation becomes the property of believers. Through the icon, as well as through Holy Bible, we not only learn about God, we know God; through the icons of the holy saints of God, we touch a transfigured person, a partaker of Divine life; through the icon we receive the all-sanctifying grace of the Holy Spirit...

***

In the 8th century, Emperor Leo the Isaurian launched a cruel persecution against St. icons, which continued under his son and grandson. In 787, against this iconoclastic heresy, Queen Irina convened the Seventh Ecumenical Council in Nicaea, which was attended by 367 fathers.

The Ecumenical Councils (of which there were only seven) met to clarify questions of faith, the misunderstanding or inaccurate interpretation of which caused confusion and heresy in the Church. The rules of church life were also developed at the Councils. At the end of the 8th century, a new heresy appeared in the Church - iconoclasm. The iconoclasts denied the veneration of the earthly sanctity of the Mother of God and the saints of God and accused the Orthodox of worshiping a created creature - an icon. A fierce struggle arose around the question of the veneration of icons. Many believers rose up to defend the shrine and were subjected to severe persecution.

All this required giving the Church a complete teaching on the icon, clearly and precisely defining it, restoring icon veneration on a par with the veneration of the Holy Cross and the Holy Gospel.

The Holy Fathers of the VII Ecumenical Council collected the church experience of the veneration of holy icons from the first times, substantiated it and formulated the dogma of icon veneration for all times and for all peoples who profess Orthodox faith. The Holy Fathers proclaimed that the veneration of icons is the law and Tradition of the Church, it is directed and inspired by the Holy Spirit living in the Church. The depiction of icons is inseparable from the gospel narrative. And what the gospel word tells us through hearing, the same icon shows through the image.

The Seventh Council affirmed that icon painting is a special form of revelation of Divine reality, and through Divine Liturgy and the icon, Divine revelation becomes the property of believers. Through the icon, as well as through the Holy Scriptures, we not only learn about God, we know God; through the icons of the holy saints of God, we touch a transfigured person, a partaker of Divine life; through the icon we receive the all-sanctifying grace of the Holy Spirit. Every day the Holy Church glorifies the icons of the Mother of God, celebrates the memory of the saints of God. Their icons are placed in front of us on the lectern for worship, and the living religious experience of each of us, the experience of our gradual transformation through them, makes us faithful children of the Holy Orthodox Church. And this is the true embodiment in the world of the works of the Holy Fathers of the Seventh Ecumenical Council. That is why, of all the victories over many different heresies, only the victory over iconoclasm and the restoration of icon veneration was proclaimed the Triumph of Orthodoxy. And the faith of the Fathers of the Seven Ecumenical Councils is the eternal and immutable foundation of Orthodoxy.

And glorifying the memory of the holy fathers of the VII Ecumenical Council, we must remember that it is to them that we are obliged to give thanks for the fact that our churches and houses are consecrated with holy icons, for the living lights of lamps glimmer before them, that we bow down before the saints relics, and the incense of incense raises our hearts to heaven. And the gratitude of the revelation from these shrines filled many, many hearts with love for God and inspired to life an already completely dead spirit.

***

Troparion to the Holy Fathers of the VII Ecumenical Council, tone 8:

Glorious art Thou, O Christ our God, our fathers who have shone on earth, and by those who instructed us all to the true faith, Many-merciful, glory to Thee.

Second Troparion to the Holy Fathers of the 7th Ecumenical Council, Tone 2

We bow to Your most pure image, O Good One, asking for forgiveness of our sins, Christ God: by will, Thou didst deign to ascend the Cross in the flesh, and deliver, even thou createdt from the work of the enemy. With that thankful cry to Ty: Thou hast filled all the joys, our Savior, who came to save the world.

Kontakion to the Holy Fathers of the 7th Ecumenical Council, Tone 6

Even from the Father, having risen, the Son inexpressibly from the Woman was born by purely nature, Seeing Him, we do not brush aside the sign of the image, but, this piously delineating, we honor correctly. And for this sake, the Church, holding the true faith, kisses the icon of the incarnation of Christ.

***

Dogma on icon veneration

We do not keep everything new, written or not written, established for us Church Traditions, but from them there is only an iconic depiction, as if it harmonizes with the narration of the Gospel sermon, and serves us to assure the true, and not the imaginary incarnation of God the Word, and to a similar benefit. Even though they are pointed out to others, they are undoubtedly understood by others. With this being, as if walking on a royal path, following the God-speaking teaching of our Holy Fathers and the tradition of the Catholic Church, (for we know that this is the Holy Spirit living in it), we determine with all certainty and careful consideration:

Like the image of the honest and life-giving Cross, to believe in the saints God's churches, on sacred vessels and clothes, on walls and on boards, in houses and on paths, honest and holy icons, painted with paints and from fractional stones and from other substances capable of this, arranged as icons of the Lord and God and our Savior Jesus Christ, and Our Immaculate Lady, the Holy Mother of God, as well as honest angels, and all the saints and reverend men. Eliko more often through the image on the icons are visible, the ceiling, looking at them, they are moved to remember and love the prototypes of them, and honor them with kissing and reverent worship, not true, according to our faith, worship of God, which befits the one Divine nature, but reverence according to that image , as if the image of the honest and life-giving Cross and the holy Gospel and other shrines are honored with incense and the setting of candles, such a pious custom was among the ancients. For the honor given to the image passes to the archetypal, and the worshiper of the icon worships the being depicted on it. Thus, the teaching of our Holy Fathers is affirmed, that is, the tradition of the Catholic Church, from end to end of the earth, having received the Gospel.

Three hundred and sixty-seven Holy Fathers

Seventh Ecumenical Council, Nicaea

***

Thoughts on an icon

In its definitions, the Seventh Ecumenical Council repeatedly indicates what the veneration of holy icons should be like, how an icon can be saving. The Council believes that the main meaning of the veneration of icons is not in veneration and worship of the very matter of the icon, not in the veneration of the boards and paints or mosaic tiles themselves, but in the spiritual effort, looking at the image, to raise attention to the very source of the image to the Invisible Prototype God. Such a confession of the veneration of icons by the Seventh Ecumenical Council places the sacred image, as it were, on the verge of the visible and tangible world and the spiritual, divine world. The icon becomes, as it were, a visible symbol of the invisible world, its tangible seal, and its meaning is to be the bright gate of ineffable secrets, the path of divine ascent.

The Seventh Ecumenical Council and the Fathers of the Church, whose creations were of particular importance at the Council, in particular, perhaps, St. John of Damascus, emphasize precisely this meaning of the veneration of icons. Basically, for the fathers of the Cathedral, the icon of Christ and the icon of the Mother of God, especially when She is depicted with the Child, is evidence of the unfalseness of the incarnation of Christ. There is another meaning of such inseparability of the icons of Christ and the Mother of God. As L. Uspensky points out, the icon of Christ is the image of the incarnated God, while the icon of the Mother of God is the perfect image of the deified man, on which our salvation rests. The Word became flesh in order to make man a partaker of the Divine.

Icons of saints are confirmation and development of the same basis. The Image of Christ not made by hands is, as it were, the first seal and the source of every image, and every image comes from it and is born in it, the source of a river that rushes its waters into endless life. These waters are an innumerable wealth of icons, generated and originating from the Image of Christ Not Made by Hands and guiding the Church in its relentless movement towards the end of time and the Kingdom of the Future Age.

And I also think that the Image of Christ Not Made by Hands is not only a source of sacred images, but also an image that sheds light and sanctifies both the image and non-church art. For example, primarily the art of portraiture. In this sense, the icon in its church liturgical existence is not separated from external art, but is like a snowy peak that pours streams into the valley, filling it and giving life to everything. There is another intimate connection between the icon and external, non-ecclesiastical painting. The icon engenders in painting, alien to the Church, sometimes completely earthly, a mysterious thirst to become churched, to change its nature, and the icon in this case is a heavenly leaven, from which the dough sours.

Quoted from:

Gregory Krug, monk. Thoughts on the icon. -M., 2007

VII Ecumenical Council. Miniature from the Minology of Basil II.

October eleventh, St. Orthodox Church creates a remembrance of the holy fathers of the Seventh Ecumenical Council (If October 11th happens on one of the days of the week, then the service to the fathers of the VII Ecumenical Council is celebrated on the nearest Sunday. - Ed.). The reason for his convocation by the pious Empress Irina and the Patriarch Tarasius of Constantinople was the so-called heresy of the iconoclasts.

The beginning of this heresy dates back to the time of Emperor Leo the Isaurian, who issued a decree ordering the removal of holy icons from churches and houses and burning them in squares, as well as destroying images of the Savior, the Mother of God and saints placed in cities in open places or located on walls temples. When the people began to interfere with the execution of this decree, then Leo joined their zealous admirers to the shrines persecuted by them. Immediately a command was issued to kill all those who made up the crowd. And many - especially women - fell on that day from the swords of the iconoclasts for their love and zeal for the holy icons. Then the emperor ordered the closing of the higher theological school of Constantinople and thereby depriving the Orthodox of that victorious weapon in the fight against the iconoclasts, which they were able to extract from a thorough theological education. Some of the Byzantine historians even say that for the same purposes he burned the rich library that was with her. But the persecutor met everywhere a sharp contradiction to his orders. From Syria, from Damascus, Saint John of Damascus wrote against them. From Rome, after the death of Gregory II, his successor, Pope Gregory III, continued to write. And from other places they answered them even with open rebellions.

The son and successor of Leo Konstantin Kopronym, without deviating from the direction taken by his father in relation to the issue of venerating St. icons, he decided to influence mainly the clergy, because everywhere the active opponents of the iconoclasts were mainly bishops and monks.

For this purpose, he tried to convene a council at which icon veneration was condemned. The next consequence of the false ecumenical council was that the icons were thrown out of the churches and mostly burned, the picturesque and mosaic sacred images on the walls of the temples were rubbed with lime. Even the magnificent Blachernae Church of the Mother of God did not escape such a fate, on the walls of which the best artists depicted the whole earthly life The God-man, all His miracles, all the events of the Gospel history, ending with the descent of the Holy Spirit upon the apostles. From persecution of icons Copronym moved on to persecution of holy relics; they were ordered to be thrown away. This was done, for example, with St. the relics of the Great Martyr Euthymia: her relics, together with the tomb, were thrown out of the temple and thrown into the sea, and the magnificent Chalcedon temple, dedicated to her name, was turned into barracks. Considering the monks as the main champions of icon veneration, Copronymus decided to close all the monasteries. Many monasteries of Constantinople, starting with the famous Dalmatian, were turned into barracks or destroyed. Many monks were martyred. At this, they usually smashed the heads of the monks on the very icons in whose defense they spoke.

During the reign of Copronymus' successor, Leo IV, the iconodules could breathe a little more freely. But the complete triumph of icon veneration took place only under Empress Irina, who, due to the infancy of her son Konstantin, took the throne of her husband Leo IV after his death. Having taken the throne, she first of all returned from exile all the monks exiled for icon veneration, and left most of the episcopal departments to zealous icon worshipers. Then she returned St. relics all the honors that were taken from them by the iconoclasts. But the empress realized that all this was still not enough for a complete restoration of icon veneration. It was necessary to convene an ecumenical council, which would condemn the recent council convened by Copronym and restore the truth of icon veneration. Tarasy especially insisted on this during his election to the patriarchal throne.

“If the empress really wants,” he declared, “for Tarasius to accept the burden of patriarchal rule, then he agrees, but only under the condition of convening an Ecumenical Council.”

Having listened to this explanation of Tarasius, the empress took him to the senators and clergy who had gathered in the Matavrsky Palace to elect a patriarch. In a strong and expressive speech, Tarasius, in front of this assembly, declared that if they want him to accept the patriarchate, then let them convene an Ecumenical Council to approve icon veneration. The majority of those present recognized the demand of Tarasius as just, and Tarasius was consecrated as patriarch on the feast of the Nativity of Christ in the year 784. Soon, on behalf of the Empress Irina and her son Constantine, for whose infancy she ruled the state, a message was sent to the Pope Adrian with an invitation to the cathedral. Patriarch Tarasy added an invitation to this message on his own behalf. The pope refused the honor of attending the council in person. He sent two legates from himself: Peter, protopresbyter of the Church of the Holy Apostle Peter in Rome, and Peter, hegumen of the monastery of St. Savvas in Rome. Representatives from the Patriarchs of Alexandria and Antioch also arrived in Constantinople. These were their elder syncelli: presbyters John and Thomas. In addition to the powers from their patriarchs, they also brought a message from the Jerusalem patriarch, in which the latter expressed his consent to the approval of icon veneration. The bishops of the Patriarchate of Constantinople were also summoned to the capital. At the beginning it was supposed to open the cathedral in the summer of 786 in the Constantinople church of St. Apostles. Everything was already prepared for the opening of the council meetings, when suddenly, on the eve of their opening itself, a riot broke out in Constantinople among the troops, which prevented the council from taking place. The cathedral was opened only in the autumn of the following year (September 24) and no longer in Constantinople, but in Nicea, close to it, where the first Ecumenical Council took place, in the church of St. Sofia. The exact number of members of the council has not been established. In any case, there were more than three hundred of them, because under the conciliar acts there is a signature of 307 bishops. The council began with a speech by Patriarch Tarasius, after which the imperial letter to the council was read. After reading it, they began to analyze the guilt of the bishops involved in iconoclasm.

After this, the imperial secretary Leonty reminded the council of the need to listen to the message about St. icons of Pope Adrian to the emperor and patriarch. These epistles open before us the veil of the deepest apostolic antiquity and reveal how St. Church. After reading both of these epistles, the representatives of the pope wished to know whether the patriarch and all the members of the council agreed with them?

Tarasy answered that he accepts everything that is written by the pope.

“This must be followed,” he said, “to contradict it is to act foolishly. And we ourselves, on the basis of the Scriptures, conclusions and proofs, having studied the truth and knowing it on the basis of the teachings of the fathers, have firmly and irrevocably confessed and will continue to confess, according to the ancient tradition of St. father, picturesque icons, worshiping them with ardent love, since they are in the name of the Lord God and the Immaculate Lady of our Holy Mother of God, St. apostles and all the saints, but we will relate worship and faith to the One True God.”

“The whole holy council also teaches,” came the answer to his words from all the members of the council.

Then there was read the circular letter of Patriarch Tarasius, written by him to the bishops and presbyters of Antioch, Alexandria and Jerusalem upon accession to the patriarchal throne, and the letter of the eastern patriarchs in response to it. After reading these messages, the fathers of the cathedral unanimously declared: "We completely agree with them, we accept and honor the sacred and venerable icons with love and worship them."

At the beginning of the next meeting, on the advice of Patriarch Tarasius, it was decided to revise all passages from Holy Scripture, from patristic writings, and from descriptions of the lives of the saints, which could serve as a basis for affirming the dogma of icon veneration. Among the latter, there was a great many stories about miracles that came from St. icons and relics. Here are some of them:

In the description of the martyrdom of St. Anastasia Persyanina told that during the transfer of his relics to Caesarea of Palestine, when people from everywhere rushed to meet them, one woman, named Areta, fell into doubt and said:

- "I will not worship the relics brought from Persia."

A few days later, St. The martyr appeared to Aretha in a dream and asked:

- "Do you suffer from a disease in the thighs?"

Before Aretha had time to tell him that she was well, she suddenly felt that she had indeed been ill. For a long time she languished in her illness, then, feeling temporary relief from it, she began to reflect on the reason for such an illness befell her. She spent four days in this meditation. At dawn, on the fifth of the day, St. martyr and says:

- "Go to Tetrapil. Pray to St. Anastasia and you will be healthy.

Brought to the indicated place, when she saw the icon of St. martyr, loudly exclaimed:

- "This is truly the one whom I saw in a dream."

Throwing herself on the platform, she wept for a long time with tears of repentance and got up completely healthy.

After reading at the cathedral the story of the seven miracles, the representatives of the pope declared that this icon of St. Anastasia with his honest head is in one of the monasteries of Rome at the present time, and the Bishop of Tauromenia John added to their statement that he knows one woman from Sicily, who, while in Rome, received from the icon of St. martyr healing.

Then Peter, Bishop of Nicomedia, reported the miracle that had taken place from the icon of the Lord in Berytus, and from Evagrius the story of the Edessa miracle from the image of the Savior not made by hands was given. The miracle was this:

One day Edessa was besieged by Khozroi, the king of Persia. From the huge embankments made on his orders, the soldiers fired through the city walls at the inhabitants of the city. The besieged inhabitants decided to dig under the embankments and then burn them. But the fire they built in the digs, for lack of fresh air, went out every time. Then the Edessians took the Image Not Made by Hands and brought it to the dug ditches. Having sprinkled the image with water, they splashed it with drops flowing down on it onto the weakly burning fire in the piled firewood, and immediately all the firewood was enveloped in an unusual flame. Turning them into coal, the flame passed to the upper trees and quickly destroyed all the buildings of Khozroy.

While reading this narrative, the reader of the great Church of Constantinople said:

- “I myself am an unworthy slave, when I went to Syria with the royal apocrysiars, I was in Edessa and saw this Image Not Made by Hands; the faithful revere him and worship him.”

Many other similar extracts from patristic writings, similar to those given above, were read at the meetings that followed the first sessions of the council. When the fathers of the cathedral, as Patriarch Tarasy put it, “were satisfied with the patristic testimonies,” one venerable icon was brought to the middle of the meetings, and in front of it all the fathers present at the cathedral, kissing it, uttered twenty-two short sayings, repeating each of them three times. All the main iconoclastic provisions in them were condemned and cursed.

The next sessions were devoted to the analysis of the definitions of the pseudo-ecumenical Council of Copronimos. This analysis was carried out with the greatest care. It was conducted all the time through the mediation of two persons, as it were, two sides: one read what was determined by the false council, the other read a refutation of what was false in the definitions. The places of Holy Scripture, falsely interpreted by the Council of Copronimos, have now undergone a new interpretation. For example: from the Old Testament Scriptures, in defense of their opinions, the iconoclasts pointed to the prohibition of the Decalogue: do not make yourself an idol (Ex. 20, 4).

The fathers of the cathedral answered this:

“The sayings spoken to the people of Israel, who served the calf and were no strangers to Egyptian errors, cannot be transferred to the Divine assembly of Christians. God, intending to bring the Jews into the land of promise, therefore gave them a commandment: do not make for yourself an idol, that idolaters lived there, worshiping demons, and the sun, and the moon, and stars, and other creatures, even birds, and quadrupeds, and reptiles, and not worshiping only the Living and True God. When, by the command of the Lord, Moses created the Tabernacle of the meeting, then, showing that everything serves God, he prepared human-shaped cherubim from gold, which were the image of reasonable cherubim.

Also, some passages from patristic writings were falsely interpreted by the pseudo-ecumenical council. In their defense, the iconoclasts cited, for example, such a place from the works of St. Athanasius of Alexandria:

“How can one not feel sorry for those who worship creation, for the reason that the sighted bow to those who do not see, and those who are gifted with hearing to those who do not hear? “The creature will never save the creature.”

But the council explained that St. Athanasius in this place had in mind the pagans and directed his speech against them; Christians never served the creature instead of the One God of all, as the iconoclasts accused them. It also turned out that the iconoclasts often cited the patristic words in fragments, without connecting them with the speech preceding them and following them, which is why these words could receive the meaning they desired.

Finally, some of the expressions cited by the iconoclastic council turned out to be completely false.

As soon as it turned out that the grounds that the false ecumenical council had given to justify its creeds were false and insufficient, it became clear to everyone that its very creeds, approved on such grounds, were false, and therefore the fathers of the council soon moved on to the final elaboration of its own conciliar definition of faith. In this final definition of faith, the fathers of the council found it necessary to first mention the reason for the convening of the council and the labors undertaken by it, then - to quote literally the entire Creed and the refutation of all those heresies that had already been refuted by the six previous Ecumenical Councils and, finally, to affirm for all time dogma of icon veneration:

- “We determine that holy and honest icons are offered for worship in the same way as the image of the honest and life-giving Cross, whether they be made of paints, or mosaic tiles, or from any other substance, if only they were made in a decent way , and whether they will be in St. churches of God, on sacred vessels and clothes, on walls and planks, or in houses and along roads, and whether these will be icons of the Lord and God, our Savior Jesus Christ or our Immaculate Lady the Holy Mother of God, or honest Angels and all saints and righteous men. The more often, with the help of icons, they become the subject of our contemplation, the more those who look at these icons are excited to remember the primitives themselves, acquire more love for them and receive more incentives to give them kisses, veneration and worship, but no true worship, but no true worship. which, according to our faith, belongs to the Divine nature alone. Those who look at these icons are excited to bring incense to the icons and put candles in their honor, as was done in antiquity, because the honor given to the icon refers to its prototype, and the worshiper of the icon worships the post of the one depicted on it. “Those who dare to think or teach otherwise,” “if they are bishops or clerics,” should be “deposed,” “if there are monks or laity,” should be excommunicated.

The council ended with the glorification of the Lord by all the bishops, chiefs, military officials and other citizens of Constantinople, who filled the halls of the palace in countless numbers. Lists of conciliar acts were sent to the pope, the eastern patriarchs, the empress with the emperor, and all the churches of the Patriarchate of Constantinople.

So solemnly ended the Seventh Ecumenical Council, which restored the truth of icon veneration and is still annually commemorated on October 11 by the entire Orthodox Eastern Church.

← A. N. Muravyov, Letters on Divine Services of the Eastern Catholic Church (Kyiv 1873).
Archbishop Anthony (Sinkevich), Los Angeles. Love for God and neighbor. (Word at Vespers on the day of the glorification of St. Optina Elders) →

01.03.2021

Psychologist's advice

The most interesting:

Vanga's predictions over the years about Russia and the world, determining fate by the date of birth of Edgar Cayce about the financial well-being and integrity of Russia

Online fortune-telling "Yes - No", free virtual fortune-telling

Divination oracle sphere. Divination online. The meaning of tarot cards in the layout for love